| 1 |
On 22 Apr 2016 03:44, Leno Hou wrote: |
| 2 |
> 2) The problem is due to the wrong $LD="ld -m elf64ppc" when link. |
| 3 |
> This patch sets $LD="ld -m elf64lppc" in m4/libtool.m4 on ppc64le. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
i'm looking at the upstream libtool project and i'm not seeing |
| 6 |
these changes in there. have you sent patches to them to update |
| 7 |
libtool ? otherwise, all packages will continue to be created |
| 8 |
with bad versions in them ... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
what upstream has right now is: |
| 11 |
if AC_TRY_EVAL(ac_compile); then |
| 12 |
case `/usr/bin/file conftest.o` in |
| 13 |
*32-bit*) |
| 14 |
case $host in |
| 15 |
... |
| 16 |
powerpc64le-*linux*) |
| 17 |
LD="${LD-ld} -m elf32lppclinux" |
| 18 |
;; |
| 19 |
powerpc64-*linux*) |
| 20 |
LD="${LD-ld} -m elf32ppclinux" |
| 21 |
;; |
| 22 |
... |
| 23 |
*64-bit*) |
| 24 |
case $host in |
| 25 |
... |
| 26 |
powerpcle-*linux*) |
| 27 |
LD="${LD-ld} -m elf64lppc" |
| 28 |
;; |
| 29 |
powerpc-*linux*) |
| 30 |
LD="${LD-ld} -m elf64ppc" |
| 31 |
;; |
| 32 |
... |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
your 2.4.2 patch makes sense in that it had no LE support, so you |
| 35 |
need to add the tuple matching. however, the 2.4.4 & 2.4.6 patches |
| 36 |
are applying to libtool versions that know how to handle LE. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
keep in mind that the logic here is just for handling mismatch in |
| 39 |
the expected bitness and the tuple. i.e. when you're using a tuple |
| 40 |
like powerpc-linux-gnu (which is normally 32bit) but you're actually |
| 41 |
producing 64-bit code. |
| 42 |
-mike |
Archives